Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: rodenstock v. schneider  (Read 6993 times)

geesbert

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 642
    • http://www.randlkofer.com
rodenstock v. schneider
« on: November 23, 2008, 05:03:59 pm »

i am looking to buy two more lenses for my linhof 679 with an aptus 7 back.

schneider 47mm digitar or rodenstock 45mm digital

and

schneider 90mm digitar or rodenstock 90mm digital



for the wide lens i am leaning towards the rodenstock, it's half a stop faster and i was told the rear element is smaller, so movements a easier. image circle is a tad larger

for the normal lens i lean towards the schneider, again, faster, quite cheaper but it has a smaller imgae circle.


i am pretty new to large format and i have no really chance to try the lenses, so what would you choose?
is this a canon vs. nikon thing or are there real differences?

stefan
Logged
-------------------------
[url=http://ww

michaelnotar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 367
rodenstock v. schneider
« Reply #1 on: November 23, 2008, 10:03:06 pm »

while i dont have those lenses, i am a huge fan of schneiders, i have a 35mm digitar on my cambo WDS and it is darn near perfect, im super happy with it. i considered the WDS system with schneider lenses vs the horseman swd2 with rodenstock lenses, even though much more expensive i went with the WDS. for the wide angle, the schneider seem a hair better, about the price difference. i also have a rodenstock 105mm 5.6 digitar on a view camera, and i am very happy with it too. according to others, 105-150mm range both brands are practically the same.  so i went with the rodenstock since it was about $950-1000 the cheaper end of lenses. i have also been a fan of schneider lenses since my film days.

see captureintegration.com, they have some tests with the wds/swd and with schneider/rodenstock lenses.

i speak from using those lenses with my P1 P25 back, 22MP, 9u pixel size, 36x48mm sensor size. also the schneider 24mm is incredible, i have rented it.

all the schneider WA lenses are insanely sharp edge to edge no vignetting (with center filter), everything you could ask for a lens but in awide angle lens, quite an achievement.

i think capture integration has a used 80mm digital lens (demo) that is quite cheap, like half off.

my dealer recommends schneider and i feel they have a hair lead on the others, but you definately cant go wrong. its like A- vs A/A+.
Logged

arc-technika

  • Guest
rodenstock v. schneider
« Reply #2 on: November 24, 2008, 12:16:48 am »

More on the wider side of lenses:

After comparing the Schneider 24mm XL and Rodenstock 28mm HR lenses for an ALPA 12 Max and TC, I'm very happy with the 28HR. IMHO, the Rodenstock seems to be at least 1 stop sharper than the 24XL. At infinity, the 28HR at f/4.5 and f/5.6 split is as sharp as the Schneider at f/8-f/11. Also, because of the incredibly sharp image circle, I do not have to use a center filter with the 28HR even with an 8mm vertical shift (the 24XL has around a 2-3mm maximum shift).

The new Rodenstock 23mm HR will be even more phenomenal, as it has a larger image circle with less distortion at the edge of it's image circle. I'm very excited to get my hands on one as soon as they get out (hopefully).


Either way, Michael's definitely right about A- vs A+, you'll be happy with any of the digital series lenses. However, the Schneider 47mm Digitar is a different kind of beast because of it's monster image circle.
Logged

RobertJ

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 706
rodenstock v. schneider
« Reply #3 on: November 24, 2008, 09:09:08 pm »

I'd forget about the 90mm digitar and digital lenses, and go with the Rodenstock HR 100mm f/4 instead.

I think all of the HR lenses are a tiny step above the "digital" and "digitar" lenses.
Logged

klane

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 931
  • I live in a c-stand fort.
rodenstock v. schneider
« Reply #4 on: November 24, 2008, 09:32:27 pm »

Quote from: T-1000
I'd forget about the 90mm digitar and digital lenses, and go with the Rodenstock HR 100mm f/4 instead.

I think all of the HR lenses are a tiny step above the "digital" and "digitar" lenses.

Why? The 100 hr is much more expensive. I have no doubt its a great lens, but the 90 digitar is extremely sharp and stays sharp up to f22
Logged

rainer_v

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1194
    • http://www.tangential.de
rodenstock v. schneider
« Reply #5 on: November 25, 2008, 03:27:50 am »

Quote from: klane
Why? The 100 hr is much more expensive. I have no doubt its a great lens, but the 90 digitar is extremely sharp and stays sharp up to f22
one of the advantages of the HR lenses is that they have not to be stopped down to be sharp till the edges. this is a big plus in lo light situations.
Logged
rainer viertlböck
architecture photograp

geesbert

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 642
    • http://www.randlkofer.com
rodenstock v. schneider
« Reply #6 on: November 25, 2008, 04:19:22 am »

but the hr's image circles are much smaller, though i am not shure how much of a problem a 70mm circle is for a 37x48 sensor.

i need a lot of movement, for the 90m more tilt, for the 45/47 rather shift...

the 90mm lens is for tabletop, the wide angle for interiors
« Last Edit: November 25, 2008, 04:32:50 am by geesbert »
Logged
-------------------------
[url=http://ww

rainer_v

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1194
    • http://www.tangential.de
rodenstock v. schneider
« Reply #7 on: November 25, 2008, 07:07:20 am »

Quote from: geesbert
but the hr's image circles are much smaller, though i am not shure how much of a problem a 70mm circle is for a 37x48 sensor.

i need a lot of movement, for the 90m more tilt, for the 45/47 rather shift...

the 90mm lens is for tabletop, the wide angle for interiors
with the 60 and the 100HR you have far more image circle than the data sheet is telling you. the 70mm are in the HR specifications. in fct you can shift over 20mm without siginificant sharpness loss.
Logged
rainer viertlböck
architecture photograp

rhsu

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 148
rodenstock v. schneider
« Reply #8 on: December 02, 2008, 11:47:44 pm »

I've tested both brands of the 35mm (HR and Digitar) and only the HR28mm.  HR lenses as mentioned above - "seems" better!  Certainly the HR28 - incredible piece of arsenal!  However, when using in view cameras, not only sharpness is paramount (as both are deemed sharp for normal photography application), but how much movement does one need for the photography, thus IC becomes important and f-stop.  For instance, get a HR35 and your movement is restricted cf to 35 Digitar.  So it's not just which brand is better.  Thought I pop my worth of 2 years of testing those lenses before I opened up my wallet to one of them.
Logged

Jimbob2

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 84
rodenstock v. schneider
« Reply #9 on: December 22, 2008, 03:23:14 pm »

Thought I'd ask a question within this link because of the previous discussions about Rodenstock HR lenses.
I currently have a Schneider digitar 80mm.  It is a beautiful lens, very sharp high contrast images.  
Unfortunately, I find it too wide for my liking, but I was told that the 100mm Schneider image is almost as wide angle.  
Does anyone know if the 100mm Rodenstock HR is "less wide angle" than the 80mm or 100mm Schneider?

Thanks for the info..
Logged

macfly

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17
    • Andrew Macpherson
rodenstock v. schneider
« Reply #10 on: December 26, 2008, 12:53:25 am »

I tried out most of the latest wide to normal S & R lenses on my Alpa /P45+ system before buying, and found the R 28mm & 60mm HR's are in a class of their own - however both my use and testing is strictly Alpa mounted on a no movement landscape/reportage set up.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2008, 12:54:31 am by macfly »
Logged
Andrew Macpherson
www.macfly.com
LA CA USA
Pages: [1]   Go Up